JOSEPH FARAH, MODERATOR: I want to explain the format for tonight's debate. The debate consists of three rounds, which I will explain as we get to each one. The candidates will have the opportunity to make brief opening and closing statements, and each candidate will also get an extra two minutes that they may use at any time. If a candidate wants to make his statement longer, use more time to answer a question, or challenge another candidate's statement, he can use one of these two minutes.

As each of these minutes is used, a yellow light will be turned on by the candidate at his podium. Any minutes that are unused after the three rounds can be used to give a longer closing statement. I will remind the candidates that if any of you go ten seconds over the time allotted on the screens for your answer, you risk losing one of those extra minutes.

Now I would like to introduce our panel of questioners for Round One. We have Buddy Smith from the American Family Association. Janet Folger, President, Faith2Action. Rabbi Aryeh Spero, President of the Jewish Action Alliance. Pastor Doug Sauder of Calvary Chapel in Fort Lauderdale. And last, but certainly not least, Phyllis Schlafly, President and Founder of Eagle Forum.

The candidates will now make their opening statements. Gentlemen, you each have one minute, unless you want to use one of your extra minutes. We are going to start with the podium from the far right of the stage. That would be Ambassador Keyes.

[OPENING STATEMENTS]

AMBASSADOR ALAN KEYES: Thank you very much. I think we are all pretty well aware of the major challenge that's facing our country today. I feel gratified, because even in the population that goes beyond the population of belief, it is now understood by many Americans that the greatest crisis we face is the crisis of our moral values and principles.

Sadly, I think a lot of our political leaders don't seem to understand this. They don't seem to understand that a country that is based, as we are, on the truth that our rights come from God cannot hope to survive unless we revive our allegiance to the existence and the authority of God.

Every issue we face, every problem we face, can be traced back to our abandonment of this principle. I believe that the time is long passed when we must hoist on high the banner of our Creator, God, and never let it fall again, though we die for it!

FARAH: Representative Duncan Hunter.

REPRESENTATIVE DUNCAN HUNTER: Thank you, Joe. I'm Duncan Hunter, and I'm running for President of the United States based on a platform of national defense, enforceable borders  I built that border fence in San Diego, and wrote the law that takes it across the southwest  and bringing back high-paying manufacturing jobs that we pushed offshore because of bad trade deals with communist China and the rest of the world.

I believe very strongly that God still loves this nation, that we are still a people of faith, and hope, and character. And so I am running for the presidency of the United States. I want to lead this country and serve the American people. And I hope all of you will join me. Thank you.

FARAH: Dr. Ron Paul?

REPRESENTATIVE RON PAUL: The most important promise a president makes is his promise to obey the Constitution. In realizing this, we know that the Constitution was written in order to restrain the government, to restrain the federal government, but was meant to retain the rights and privileges and obligations to the states and to the people. Today, we have drifted a long way from that, and now we have jurisdictional fights over what we ought to do.

A free country is designed for individuals to deal with a subject of virtue and excellence. Once we defer to the government to get involved in worrying about our virtue and our excellence and perfect, fair economies, it is done at the sacrifice of liberty. If we do that and we sacrifice that liberty and the job of virtue and excellence is taken over by the government, you can only do that through tyranny. The only way we can solve our problems is expecting to do the things . . .

[bell sounds]

FARAH: You may finish your sentence.

Senator Sam Brownback?

SENATOR SAM BROWNBACK: I want to use an extra minute, if I can. I want to start off talking about the basics.

We're in football season. Vince Lombardi, the great Packer, legendary Packer coach, would start every football season with his team by holding up a football. And he would say, "Men, this is a football." I always thought that was kind of odd that he would do that. And then he would go from there to blocking and tackling.

I think we, as a country, have got to get back to the basics. And I think we have wandered away from it. And until we get back to the basics, we're not going to be able to grow and prosper. And to me those basics are: life  that every life is sacred, beautiful, unique child of a loving God; family  that the best place to raise a child is between a mom and dad bonded together for life; and faith. Faith is an important thing. And it's something that we've been running out of the public square when we should be inviting it into the public square.

One of the people that I've held up as a key figure that I've looked at throughout life is Mother Teresa. The one time that I met her, I put her in her car as she was leaving Capitol Hill, and she said three words to me, four times. She said, "All for Jesus. All for Jesus. All for Jesus. All for Jesus." And that frail little woman with that powerful faith took care of millions of people, inspired billions around the world, with a simple philosophy.

It happens to be a philosophy, if you look at the motto of our land is "in God we trust." And I think we have got to get back to that basic: rebuilding the family, renewing the culture, reviving the economy, so that we can grow, prosper, and sustain ourselves in this long-term, generation-long battle we're in with militant Islamists. We have got to get back to the basics. Thank you very much.

FARAH: Thank you. John Cox?

BUSINESSMAN JOHN COX: I agree, Sam. And one of the basics is found in Matthew 6:24, which says that you can't serve God and money. And you know what? I think the same thing holds in politics. Right now, Washington is populated by people who are involved in politics to make money for themselves, to make it a career. I think that's why we have the corruption that we've seen. I think that's why we have the partisanship. I think that's why we have the failure of results.

I'm an outsider. I'm a businessman. I'm the only one up here who has ever run a business and been a chief executive. That's what we need in this party. I'm a proud conservative Republican. And I'm ashamed and I'm disappointed at what the Republican leadership had did with the majority that we worked so hard to build. I want to get this party back to its core. I want to get it back to its basics. And we need an outsider  someone who has run a business, who has gotten results in the private sector to do that. Thank you.

FARAH: Representative Tom Tancredo?

REPRESENTATIVE TOM TANCREDO: You know, it has often been said that any great civilization cannot be conquered from without until it actually destroys itself from within. I think most of us are here tonight because we share some sort of concern. We share the general feeling that there is a degradation of our own society, especially the morals of our society. We recognize that it is important for us. This is an important issue in order for us to survive in this clash of civilizations  by the way, with which I believe with all my heart we are engaged.

A president has relatively few options available to him in order to direct the moral course of the nation, but can certainly be profoundly influential. George Washington was by himself a leader, and set the soul of this nation, created the soul of the nation. Ronald Reagan, constantly uplifting the nation. Bill Clinton redefined morality to the level of an alley cat. We know that this can happen. We know presidents have this kind of thing. I guarantee you that I will try my level best as long as I breathe to take us in a different direction.

FARAH: Governor Mike Huckabee?

GOVERNOR MIKE HUCKABEE: First of all, I want to say thanks to everyone for giving us this opportunity. I must say, it's unlike any debate I've been a part of so far. I cannot imagine Chris Matthews opening in prayer and having a choir at some of the other debates we've had. And how refreshing this is to be a part of this tonight. I think all of us who were on the state prayed during those debates. I'm not sure that the moderators were praying. But we'd better be praying for our country. We really better be praying for our country, because it's in trouble. In part, because we have a nation that is sharply divided, polarized, and in Congress, it's so polarized, it's become paralyzed. The things that we send people to government to do they fail to do.

And what we need is not horizontal leadership that just simply always fights everything left, right; liberal, conservative; Democrat, Republican. But that reminds this country that what makes us great is when we're vertical. When we go up, not down, and we take this nation where this nation must go.

FARAH: All right. This is where it gets really interesting. Look at that panel over there. That panel is the panel that struck fear into the hearts of four Republican presidential candidates. This is the reason that some are not with us tonight.

We will now proceed to our first round of questions. Each question asked by our panel during this round will be open-ended, and each of the candidates will be given one minute to respond. We'll be starting at the left side of the state this time, and we'll alternate with each question, to try to make it fair for everyone. Buddy Smith of the American Family Association, get us started.

[ROUND ONE]

BUDDY SMITH, AMERICAN FAMILY ASSOCIATION: Good evening, gentlemen. Marriage has been a socially-protected union between a man and a woman for the physical, psychological, emotional, and spiritual reproduction of children in every culture, and nearly every time in history. States have a special interest, and human beings have a psychological, emotional, and spiritual interest in man-woman couples that stay together to rear children. If elected, will you support a federal marriage amendment, and what else will you do to protect the institution of marriage?

FARAH: Governor Huckabee.

HUCKABEE: Well, I would try to do the same things that I did as governor of Arkansas, where I led a constitutional amendment that was passed overwhelmingly by our voters that affirmed what marriage is. Marriage is a relationship between one man, one woman, for life.

I also believe that we need to do other things. I declared a state of marital emergency in our state, called pastors and other clergy together to commit to community marriage policies, to not engage in carrying on marriages unless they had counseled with the couple beforehand. We were one of the few states that passed a covenant marriage bill in Arkansas.

We also tried to pass tax policies that favored the family by eliminating things like the marriage penalty and increasing the child tax care credit, so that families aren't penalized for the result of their marriage.

I would support strongly and lead  not just support, but lead  an effort to have a constitutional amendment to affirm marriage as between one man, one woman, for life.

FARAH: I just want to remind delegates who are voting in our audience tonight, you have until the end of this segment to cast their votes.

Representative Tom Tancredo?

TANCREDO: Of course the answer is yes, I would do everything possible to support an amendment that strictly defined what marriage is in this country, and that is between one man and one woman, and there are a lot of reasons why that has to happen.

You know, the government actually doesn't have any real responsibility or any authority to tell somebody about who they should care about, but it has every single right in the world to establish what exactly a marriage is. Because it is that foundation upon which this system rests  in fact, any society.

That is the thing to which we look, that institution is the thing to which we look for the procreation of children, for the rearing of children in an environment that is healthy and good for the society at large.

So, yes, we have a right, and you have to remember that we are always just one kooky judge away from actually having homosexual marriage forced on all the rest of us, because of the [full faith and credit] clause in the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, we need, we absolutely have to have, a constitutional amendment that defines it in the way you just described.

FARAH: John Cox.

COX: Well, I'm very happily married, and my lovely wife is watching right now with my 2 ½-year-old daughter. And, yes, I have only been mistaken for the grandfather five times. But seriously, marriage is about protecting children. That's what it is all about. The effort by the homosexual lobby is all about trying to get the government to recognize a relationship that exists between them, and have it validated and have it benefited by government largesse.

What we need to is, certainly we need to talk about faith, but we need to talk about common sense. We need to talk about the ideals of protecting children. And that's so important for the future of our country, because, let's face it, without children, we don't have a country go forward. Talk to China. Their one-child policy is really going to lead to the destruction of that country. We need to have a marriage amendment, and you know what? That's a good exercise for this country, because as President of the United States, I will travel everywhere to argue that marriage is common sense, it protects children, and we ought to continue to justify it and honor it, and keep it the institution it should be for the protection of children.

FARAH: Senator Sam Brownback.

BROWNBACK: Buddy, as you probably know, that was the amendment I carried in the judiciary committee. It was a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. I got it through the subcommittee, I got it through the judiciary committee in the Senate. We lost it on the floor, and yes, I will lead it as president.

I wish President Bush would have led on it. That was something I was disappointed in. I thought if he had said after the last election, "I've got political capital. I'm going to spend it," that if he had pivoted and said, "and I'm going to push for a constitutional amendment on marriage," which was much more what the election was about than Social Security, we might be there now. I don't know that we would, but you have got to do these sort of things, and you have got to take that leadership, and it gets, to me, back to the basics.

We have got now in America 36% of our children born out of wedlock. In the inner cities, it's 70%. You're asking for difficult  you can raise a good child in a single-parent family, and we should celebrate when that happens, but the best place is between a mom and a dad, and the institution needs to be protected in the Constitution.

FARAH: Dr. Ron Paul.

PAUL: I think the best thing the president can do is set a good example, and I would start with having been married fifty years, and proud of it. I believe, also, that I do not see any need for another constitutional amendment. I think we have fallen into a trap that we have to redefine marriage. We're on the defensive, defining marriage. Why don't you just tell them to look it up in the dictionary, to find out what a marriage says?

For federal legal purposes, the Defense of Marriage Act is proper. It takes care of all the problems. If you have to have rules and regulations, put it at the state level, like the Constitution says. But you know, marriage only came about and getting licenses only came about in recent history for health reasons. It has nothing to do with it. True Christians, I believe, believe that marriage is a church function. It's not a state function. I don't think you need a license to get married. We should define it.

FARAH: Representative Duncan Hunter.

HUNTER: You know, I think, Ron, it's true that it's a state law that defines marriage, but it accommodates the Judeo-Christian traditions of our country. And that's why it's so important that we have that law that accommodates the Judeo-Christian traditions that maintains what is probably the most important institution in this country, which is a family. The most important institution that we have.

You know, I'm reminded of that story about the family that was off the coast of New Jersey, and they were pushed off by a riptide, and the dad told his little daughter, "I'm going to have to take the son in. I can't carry you both in. You can float on your back all day. I'll be back for you." And when the rescuers picked that little girl up hours later, she said to them, "My daddy told me that I could float on my back all day."

That confidence that marriage gives our children, that moms and dads give our children, can't be duplicated by government. We need a constitutional amendment to maintain their marriage.

FARAH: Ambassador Alan Keyes.

KEYES: First of all, I think it's quite evident that we need a constitutional amendment, from what we see going on right now, with folks who have gotten themselves supposedly "married" as gay couples, going into other states demanding that these marriages be recognized using things like the Full Faith and Credit Clause to require that every state in the Union recognize the action that has been taken by this legislature  or in fact, in Massachusetts, arbitrarily by judges, and then by Mitt Romney, who refused to acknowledge what the court had actually said, which was not that you had to perform such marriages, but that the law should be revised. He is single handedly responsible for bringing them on.

But the simple fact of the matter is, if we don't take action at the federal level, then our government will have defaulted in its respect for one of our most precious unalienable rights, which is the right to respect God's God-given institution of the natural family. Abandon God, with respect to the family, and we have no claim to rights.

FARAH: Time for a question from our second panelist, Janet Folger, President, Faith2Action, and really, the inspiration behind this evening's debate.

JANET FOLGER, FAITH2ACTION: Thank you. As you will see from the ultrasound video on the screen, science confirms the undeniable, unique human being, or person, in the womb. In Roe v. Wade, author Harry Blackmun himself stated, "If this suggestion of personhood is established, the appellant's case, of course, collapses."

By the author's own words, Roe v. Wade has collapsed. If elected, what will you do to make our laws consistent with our science, and restore legal protection and full rights of personhood to every American waiting to be born?

FARAH: We'll start from the right side, this time  my right. Ambassador Alan Keyes.

KEYES: I think the first and most important thing that we would do is champion an amendment to the United States Constitution that makes it crystal clear that the right to life of all human beings, from conception to natural death, must be respected. It's simple. It's clear. It must be done.

We also need to reiterate the truth that, in the Preamble to our Constitution, it makes it clear that the ultimate aim of our government is to "secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." Our posterity includes many we can't even imagine, who have not yet been born. Surely, it includes those who are sleeping in the womb.

I would issue an executive order immediately granting the full protection of the presidency, and every element of the executive branch, to the life in the womb.

And finally, I would make sure that no judges were appointed to the Supreme Court of the United States who did not strictly respect its mandate to secure the liberties of our posterity.

FARAH: Representative Duncan Hunter.

HUNTER: Well, the first thing I would do is pass the Hunter bill which states that life does begin at conception. You know, the second thing is simply this, and I've said this in every speech that I've made in this run for the presidency. If a judicial candidate can look at a sonogram of an unborn child and not see a valuable human life, I will not appoint that judicial candidate to the federal bench. It's as simple as that.

FARAH: Dr. Ron Paul.

PAUL: As an O.B. doctor of thirty years, and having delivered 4,000 babies, I can assure you life begins at conception. I am legally responsible for the unborn, no matter what I do, so there's a legal life there. The unborn has inheritance rights, and if there's an injury or a killing, there is a legal entity. There is no doubt about it.

I'm surprised that I don't have more co-sponsors for the Sanctity of Life Act that I have, which would solve all this problem, and would have eliminated a lot of abortions by now if we'd had passed it, and we wouldn't need any amendment. It removes the jurisdiction from the federal courts.

If the states were allowed to pass this, immediately it would go into effect. Instead of waiting years, and years, and years for an amendment, this would happen immediately, by majority vote in the Congress and a president's signature. It's a much easier way to accomplish this, by following what our Constitution directs us. Instead of looking for massive new laws, let's just use what we have, and pass this type of legislation.

FARAH: Senator Sam Brownback.

BROWNBACK: Janet, thanks for the forum and thanks for the question. I want to be the president to appoint the justice that is the final vote that we need to overturn Roe v. Wade, and end this night of wrong. I have fought for this in the Judiciary Committee. I fought for Samuel Alito, I fought for Justice Roberts, and I think that these are two new oaks that we've planted, and we need one more vote to overturn Roe.

Roe is not in the Constitution. There is not in the Constitution a fundamental right to an abortion. And Roe and Doe  Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton  are built on factual lies. I have had both of these women in to testify in front of my committee, Norma McCorvey and Sandra Cano. I have had them in to testify, and they both stated in their affidavits that there are lies, and on these lies, 40 million have died. On a bunch of lies.

It's time to end this night of wrong, and I'll fight for it, as I have in the Senate.

FARAH: John Cox.

COX: This issue tears this country apart. And it shouldn't. I'm a Christian. Most of you, if not all of you, are Christians or Jews. We believe in the right to life. We need to talk to the American people about responsibility.

You know, in 1955, my mother already had a child. She conceived me, and my real father walked out. If abortion had been legal in 1955, I wouldn't be standing here before you today. This is personal to me. It's about responsibility.

My mother took responsibility for me. She's glad she did, and I'm glad she did, and my children are glad she did. And that's what we need to talk about on this issue, with the American people. I, too, will make sure I appoint judges that don't make the law, but will interpret it only.

We fought a revolution 230 years ago against a dictator, a king who tried to dictate to us what we were going to believe. We need to end the reign of the activist judges, and restore some sanity to the right to life.

FARAH: Representative Tom Tancredo.

TANCREDO: Well, of course, I believe that all of us would appoint judges who would do exactly what we said here, and overturn Roe v. Wade. At least, I guarantee you, I would do that. That would be a litmus test. I know every time I hear the debate over the judges, they're in front of the Senate, and everybody says, "You know what? Now, there's no litmus test, here," well, I guarantee you there would be a litmus test, for me, and that is, "Will you overturn Roe v. Wade?" That 's gotta be there.

Number Two. It's the way you talk about the unborn. I'll tell you, as president, everybody in my cabinet is gonna talk about them as people, as individuals, because that's exactly what they are, because God said to Jeremiah, "I knew you before you were in the womb." He wasn't talking about a mass of cells. He was talking about a person, a human being. That's exactly the way we have to look at it. We have to understand that, in this nation, regardless of your political persuasion, all the political talk that goes around it, it goes back to this: God said, "I knew you before you were in the womb."

FARAH: Governor Mike Huckabee.

HUCKABEE: Well, it's obvious that all of us on this stage are pro-life. I think there's also a reason there are four empty podiums here tonight. There are some folks who wouldn't be real comfortable with that question. But the reason that I'm comfortable with it is because I'm not a person who became pro-life because I got into politics. I'm like a lot of you. I got into politics because I'm pro-life, and I believe that on this issue, our culture rises or falls, because it really says everything we are as a civilization, as to whether or not we value the intrinsic worth and value of every single individual human being. That's why we're looking for six coal miners in the womb of a coal mine in Huntington, Utah. And that's the reason that we have a responsibility to protect the lives in the womb of the mother or the lives of those outside that womb, from conception until natural conclusion of human life.

FARAH: Before introducing Rabbi Spero, I just want to commend everyone for the rule of law here. You are making my job very easy for me. Rabbi Spero.

RABBI ARYEH SPERO, JEWISH ACTION ALLIANCE: There is no question that jihadists have as their goal the harming of America and its citizens. What would your strategy be to protect our streets, our people, and our American way of life from the designs of radical Islam?

FARAH: And if I'm not mistaken, we'll start with Governor Huckabee this time.

HUCKABEE: The treat we face is one a lot of Americans don't fully comprehend or understand. This isn't a typical geo-political war. It's a war against an enemy that has no national borders or boundaries, and it's not a war that we are fighting over a border or boundary. It's a theological war. It's not politically correct to say that. It's just the truth. We are fighting people whose religious fanaticism will not be satisfied until every last one of us is dead, until our culture, our society, is completely obliterated from the face of the earth. It is the perfect marriage of religion and state, and that's why it is so incredibly dangerous, more so than any enemy we face.

And here's the reality. War is about will. Whoever chooses to leave loses. We can't afford to lose, because this is not a war about Iraq, it's not a war about Afghanistan, it's a war about our survival as a civilization and as a people, and every effort must be made to defend this great country against it.

FARAH: Representative Tancredo?

TANCREDO: Yes, I agree that this is nothing like we have ever faced before. We have called it a war on terror for way too long. This is not a war on terror. Terror is a tactic. It is not the thing with which we are at war. We are at war with radical Islam. I said earlier in my opening statement that it is a clash of civilizations. I believe that that is exactly where we are, and I believe that it has been going on for a long time, and will go on for a long time. The difference is, now that enemy has the technological ability to bring it to our shores.

And so, one of the things that is absolutely necessary is the defense of our borders. What does that mean? It means nobody can come across those borders. We don't know and what purpose and for how long. We have to know who they are.

And I'll tell you something I also believe, and that is this. That it is, you know, the president always says they only have to be right once, and we have to be right 100% of the time. Well, that's not good enough odds for me. You'd better think of a deterrent. You'd better think of something that's going to deter them from doing what they threaten every single day to do to us, or I guarantee you, it will happen.

FARAH: John Cox.

COX: I agree with Tom and Mike that we are facing the steepest test to our future as a country. But you know what? We faced these tests before. In the forties, find Hitler, a megalomaniac who used religion to get people to follow him, and who didn't hesitate to kill 6 million innocent Jews.

We've got to fight this with every breath of our being. But you know what? We also have to make sure that we kill the bad guys, but we also talk about spreading prosperity around the world. I don't know if we're going to get a chance to talk about Iraq, but you know what? You have got to replace evil with something else, with good.

You know, there is a thin layer of Islam that is using oil. And let me tell you, Iraq is about oil. If Saddam didn't have oil, he would not have been a threat to the United States. We have got to get that oil pumping, we have got to get the Iraqis prosperous, we have got to get them to believe in their government so we can get our troops homes, so we can claim victory against these jihadists that would use religion to kill innocent people.

FARAH: Senator Brownback?

BROWNBACK: Thanks for the question, because I think it's the central battle of our day, and I believe it's a fight we're going to be in for a generation. I think we need to start talking very clearly and convincingly to the American public about it, that we are going to be confronting this battle as long as we did communism, probably, and that this is dedicated force, militant Islamists, as I noted in my opening statement, that means to wipe out Israel and come after us. And they have said it in their papers, and they have put it forward in their documentation. I think this next president that's coming in has to come in with some foreign policy experience on how you do this, because we have got to work with certain countries, Islamic countries, and we have got to contain and confront others  like we have to contain Iran.

I think we have to do that, as well, towards the Sudan, and we have got to work with others like Pakistan and Egypt. I have chaired the Middle East subcommittee. I have worked on these topics. The world is much flatter than it has ever been before, and this is a central fight, and I am going to continue the fight, as President Bush is.

FARAH: Representative Paul?

PAUL: We indeed do have a problem, but if we go at this incorrectly, we are going to do more damage to ourselves than we are to our enemies. We have to understand the motives of those who come here and kill us. If we don't understand that, we are not going to win this fight. They come here and kill us because we occupy their lands, and they rationally reason and come and say we have to do something about it. If you are going to regulate Islamic thinking in this country, be careful, because all the rules you set will be used against Christians. So, protect civil liberties.

If you use the violation of civil liberties when it comes to habeas corpus and secrecy, et all, we are going to suffer from this. If we could have done something before 9/11, we should have gotten the government out of the way on regulating our airlines. We should have had more respect for private property, the Constitution, and especially the Second Amendment, and we wouldn't have had to face the crisis on 9/11 nearly as bad.

So, indeed, it is a problem, but the answer can be found in the Constitution, I can guarantee you.

FARAH: Representative Hunter.

HUNTER: You know, the last two nations that the United States saved before 9/11 were two Muslim nations. So, to my friend Ron Paul: don't blame America first.

Here's what we have got to do. We live in an era of terrorists with technology. That means we have to cut off every business that would sell killing technology to nations in the Middle East. It might move it to nations or to groups that might use it against us. We have got to lock down the border. That means finishing my border fence, all 854 miles that I legislated, that the president signed on October 26th, and has only build 17.9 miles. And lastly, ladies and gentlemen, we have to leave Iraq in victory.

FARAH: Ambassador Keyes?

KEYES: I think the first thing we have to understand, and we often forget it, is that the effort against terrorism isn't isolated from the dedication that you and I all have to a fundamental principle, which is that it is ordained by the law and will of Almighty God that innocent human life must be respected.

The first thing that we need to do in making sure that we have the firmness and the confidence to prosecute the War on Terror is to make sure that we understand that as we fight against the killing of innocents abroad and on 9/11 in New York, we must fight against the killing of innocents in the womb!

The principle is the same, the evil is the same, and we must stand the same against them!

And in doing that, we must enlist the aid of every human being of conscience. Islam is no excuse for abandoning that which we have agreed upon throughout the world that every nation must respect the claims of innocent human life and every group.

PASTOR DOUG SAUDER: Yes. Faith is a big part of the lives of all who are here, and we are interested to know, tell us about your personal faith, and what it means to your life.

FARAH: And we will start on this side with Ambassador Keyes.

KEYES: I believe deeply that God is the reason why we do what we do. I think our dedication to Him and in gratitude for what He has done for us in sending our Lord, Jesus Christ, is the reason we do what we do.

But I sometimes think when we ask candidates this kind of a question, we are, in a way, missing what is the more difficult point. The crisis of our time does not occur and does not exist because some individuals in our politics did not have sufficient faith in God, did not follow His path, did not say their prayer. It occurs because they do not have the guts to stand up and remind the American people that we cannot and will not remain free if we do not acknowledge the authority of God, if we do not submit to His will!

It is a national question that requires that we take the passion of our faith, and with courage and without equivocation, lay ourselves on the line for that truth, no matter what the cost.

FARAH: We want to just take a few seconds between each speaker so that delegates can votes. Representative Hunter, you're on.

HUNTER: That you. You know, I don't belong to any organized denomination. I'm a Baptist. [laughs] And I invite you all to come to our church which is headed by my neighbor, Rev. Bob Winterton, Trinity Baptist Church, population 64 on our best day. But I believe strongly in God, and that He has a purpose for all of us. And you know, I believe strongly that He has a purpose for this country.

And I'm reminded that in the Constitutional Convention, when we couldn't get together, and we had massive fights, and we couldn't put a Constitution together, old Ben Franklin got up and made what I call the Sparrow Speech, and he said, "If it's true that a sparrow can't fall to earth without God's notice, then how can we raise a great nation without His support?" And at that point, we started the tradition of a prayer before every constitutional assembly.

And I think God loves this country, and He will guide us, and He wants one of us to be the leader of this country.

FARAH: All right. Our next speaker is Representative Ron Paul.

PAUL: I get to my God through Christ. Christ, to me, is a Man of peace. He is for peace, He is not for war. He doesn't justify preemptive, declared war. I strongly believe that there is a Christian doctrine of just war. And I believe this nation has drifted from that. No matter what the rationales are, we have drifted from that, and it's very, very dangerous, and I see in many ways being unchristian. Christ is for love, and forgiveness, and turning the other cheek for peace. And to justify what we do in the name of Christianity I think is very dangerous, and not part of what Christianity is all about. Christ came here for spiritual reasons, not secular war and boundaries and geography. And yet, we are now dedicating so much of our aggressive activity in the name of God, but God, he is the Prince of Peace. That is what I see from my God and through Christ. I vote for peace.

FARAH: Senator Sam Brownback.

BROWNBACK: I vote for peace, too. But I also vote for the protection of life, and I vote for the strength of America, and I vote for our place in the world. This is a key country, and it's a country that is standing up to Islamic fascism, and it's a country that is standing up for the rights of individuals, and I think there is a just war that is going on in Iraq. And I think that that is definable, and I think that that is something we should stand for.

Doug, I appreciate your question on personal faith. I was raised on a farm in eastern Kansas, and one day, I was thirteen years old, and I was heading back to feed the sows and the Lord grabbed me, and I accepted Jesus as my personal Savior then. It really got me. It drove into me the humility of Christ, that He would grab me as I'm on the way back to feed the pigs, and how much He loved me.

In 1995, I had melanoma, and it really sunk my faith in, and it made me just live a boldness that I think all of us should live for our faith, for our Christ. Thank you.

FARAH: John Cox.

COX: Pastor, thanks for this question, because it's very important to me. I was not raised with religion. That was a gift from God. I was reborn in Christ on October 31, 1979. A man ministered to me on a train, a commuter train in Chicago  a member of the Christian businessman's committee. You know what? My faith has led me to do what I'm doing now, because I'm horrified at the lack of integrity that the career politicians have wrought on this country. We have four congressmen resign in disgrace last year, and they were Republicans. And that horrifies me and dismays me. That's why I decided to run for president.

But you know, faith is nothing without works. My faith led me to be involved in civic and charitable activities. I started a charity on the north suburbs of Chicago called Christmas in April, which repairs the homes of the elderly and disabled. You know what? That's the example that we have got to talk about, and that's what I will do as president of the United States. Faith has to be put forth in works to help others.

FARAH: Representative Tancredo.

TANCREDO: The question is, "Can you tell us a little bit about your faith in God?" Well, I have to tell you that my pastor I remember so distinctly, one day talking about the fact that we know that we are all changed when we accept Christ as our Lord and Savior. I know that that's true. We all know that's true. But you know, once we have all done that, and we all have, let's say, in this church we were in at the time  "I believe everybody here has," he said. "But why is it, if that's the case, we're all still such jerks?" [laughs]

And he said, of course, the reason is, there are two sides to us, you know? There is a fallen side, and then there is the side that has been saved by Christ. And they are in conflict all of the time. That's what is fighting inside of us.

He said  I'm going to have to tell him I'm going to have to use this  he talked about the fact that at one time he and his wife had to go on vacation. They left their two dogs. They didn't have enough money to put them into a kennel, so they left the two dogs, and they put a great big bowl of food right here, and a great big bowl of water out here . . .

[bell sounds]

I can continue going, right?

And so, they said when they came back  because they were just hoping it would work. When they came back, they said one dog, Hansel, I believe it was, Hansel was about twice as big. Gretel, the other dog, was emaciated. Because, of course, Hansel was the dominant dog. And he said, "You know, it's like that with us. It's what you feed inside. It's the side you feed that grows. And you have to look constantly for the things, for the food for Gretel."

And so, my life, every day, I try. I try, and I fail many times. But I try the best I can to find the food for Gretel. Because everywhere around us, everything you see, so much of our life is food for Hansel. You have got to be able to divide that up, and see what's feeding the good side. Because it's got to be dominant. One side will be dominant, and it's the side you feed. Let's find a way to feed Gretel every day.

FARAH: Governor Huckabee.

HUCKABEE: First of all, Sam, let me give you a suggestion on your autobiography: From Hogs to Heaven. It might be a good title you could use. [laughs]

I think the question was, "How does faith play a role in our personal lives?" Well, for me, I was a timid kid at age ten that went to vacation Bible school at a little Baptist church in Hope, Arkansas, and on that day, trusted Jesus Christ as my Savior. It was life-changing.

Sometimes, people ask me what is the greatest thing that ever happened to me, and they expect me to say, "Being elected governor," or "running for president," but the truth is, those are jobs that somebody else had before me. Somebody else is going to have after me. And those jobs have a limit. But the greatest thing that ever happened to me was coming to know Jesus Christ, because there is no limit. There are no terms set. And it's a position that I will hold forever and forever. And it doesn't just influence my life, it shapes it, it defines it, and in simple terms, in public policy, it reminds me, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." And it gets real simple after that.

FARAH: All right. Phyllis Schlafly, have at it.

PHYLLIS SCHLAFLY, EAGLE FORUM: At President Bush's press conference last month in Canada, Fox News asked him this question. Quote: "Can you say today that the Security and Prosperity Partnership is not a prelude to a North American Union, similar to a European Union?" George Bush did not deny that goal, he just ridiculed the question. Will you assure us that you will abolish all plans to promote economic integration of North America, which consists of open borders among the United States, Canada and Mexico?

FARAH: We're going to start with Governor Huckabee.

HUCKABEE: First of all, I want to thank you for writing the book It's a Choice, Not an Echo. That book has had a dramatic influence on me, and it was one of the reasons that I became a Republican as a teenager, which wasn't easy in Hope, Arkansas, where there weren't any Republicans.

But one of the things that I believe with all my heart is that this country can never, ever, ever yield its sovereignty to any other country for any reason, under any circumstance, ever. That's why I would agree that we not only need closed and secure borders, but more importantly, we need a re-understanding that we are a sovereign nation, and we do not yield ourselves over. We do not answer to international law. We answer to our Constitution, and no other authority but our Constitution. And any attempt to weaken our commitment to our own constitutional form of government is simply unacceptable to me as a president of the United States.

FARAH: We do need to just take a pause. You're doing so well, though, that I actually have to slow you down, because we do have this voting going on. Representative Tancredo.

TANCREDO: Recently, Felipe Calderσn, the President of Mexico, stated in his state of the nation address that Mexico does not end at its borders. He said that where there is a Mexican, there is now Mexico.

He is not the first president of Mexico to have said something like that. Before him, President [Vicente] Fox said something very similar. And before him, Mr. [Ernesto] Zedillo. To hear something like this, to hear a president of another country suggest that the borders between you do not exist, and to not have our president turn to them and say, "Are you nuts?"  there is something called a border, and it must be defended.

We are not simply just residents of the North American continent. That is exactly where this thing is going, a sort of an economic union where everybody believes trade is such a good thing  and I certainly think trade can be good  but why do you have to go ahead and diminish your national sovereignty in the hopes of influencing trade? Never will that happen in my administration.

FARAH: John Cox.

COX: Mrs. Schlafly, I'm proud of the fact that we are both from Illinois. It gives me great comfort at night, especially when I hear that Obama and Clinton are also from Illinois.

I, too, will never surrender the sovereignty of the United States. We absolutely have to secure the borders. We have to address the illegal immigration problem. We have to do it by putting some CEOs in jail. We have got to start enforcing the law against employing illegal aliens. That's going to solve the problem.

But we have to also make sure that we have trade with other countries. So, I'm not interested in giving up our sovereignty, but I am interested in opening up channels of trade, because, you know what, we benefit when we sell Microsoft software and we sell cell phones made by Motorola  another good Illinois company  around the world.

Trade is also a weapon of peace. You know, you're not going to bomb your most important customer. You're not going to invade your most important supplier. So we've got to make sure that we increase trade around the world, but we also have to make sure we retain our national sovereignty.

BROWNBACK: Thanks, Phyllis, for the question, and thank you for your years of service. I've worked with you on many issues, and you are an amazing person on all of the things that you have got done. And I hope that we all give her a round of applause of thank you for what she has done for years.

I am opposed to open borders. I voted for Duncan's fence, which I read in USA Today they're building up four feet taller in places to get it higher. I think we need to do that. I am opposed to a North American Union that gives up our sovereignty. I am opposed to doing that.

Like John, I am for free trade. I voted for the NAFTA agreement. I think there are questions about it, but I am for trade because I believe we should trade across borders, and that that's one of the key things we can do to grow our economy.

But I also think you gotta enforce your trade laws. And that's something we haven't done, particularly towards China. I think we're having a lot of problems of products coming in because we haven't enforced our trade laws. So, yes to trade. No to unions. And yes to enforcing the laws when you have agreements between countries.

PAUL: This is an easy one for me. Not only do I not want a North American Union, I want us out of the U.N., the IMF, the World Bank, the WTO, NAFTA and CAFTA. NAFTA has nothing to do for free trade. It's a pretence to lower tariffs, but it's a reason to go talk to the WTO to raise tariffs. We need free trade. That's very, very important. But you don't get that by world government.

And those of you who are so high-minded about sovereignty, you wouldn't support this war because there are two reasons we have gone to war. One, to go after the weapons which didn't exist, and the other was to enforce U.N. resolution. That's criminal!

I believe that if we had followed the Constitution on trade and on war, if we would have only had declared the war, we would have the debate the war instead of afterwards, after we've lost 5,000 men in the military. We ought to follow the rules of the law and the Constitution.

FARAH: Duncan Hunter.

HUNTER: I have got an idea for a real North American Union. And that would have been if Canada and Mexico, when America saddled up and sent our marines and our soldiers into Iraq into harm's way, if they had stood with us instead of running away from us, that would have been a real "North American Union."

Now, let me tell you. This isn't free trade. It's only free trade in one direction. China is moving massive amounts of goods into this country, displacing American jobs. They are cheating on trade by devaluing their currency by more than 40%, and that is sweeping American products off the shelf and taking American jobs away.

And this mass of [Mexican] trucks that come into this country will represent exposure to terrorism, because you are going to have massive cargo containers coming in, exposure for criminal elements, and lastly, that American trucking family will lose their jobs with the massive number of trucks coming in with cheap labor and cheap parts. No on the North American Union.

FARAH: Ambassador Keyes.

KEYES: Thank you. Phyllis, I think a simple answer to your question, in all of the particulars that you represented, is yes. I would undo it all, because I believe that it represents not just a surrender of our borders, not just something that involves us in an understanding of trade that is not fair to our workers, not fair to our people. It is the betrayal of the sovereignty of the people of the United States.

And by that, I don't just mean sovereignty along the borders and physical control. We have elites who no longer listen to us. We say that we want secure borders first, and they refuse to give them to us. We say that we want respect for the sovereignty of the people of the United States, and they refuse to give it to us.

Time and time again, it has become clear that somewhere along the way, we have lost control of those who are supposed to represent the sovereignty of our people.

Final point we need to understand: do you know part of the reason we are losing our own sovereignty? Because we have turned our backs on the sovereignty of Almighty God.

FARAH: All right. We actually have one more panelist, who is not physically with us this evening, but I'm sure he's here spiritually as well as digitally, and that is Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation. Let's listen to his question.

PAUL WEYRICH, FREE CONGRESS FOUNDATION: My name is Paul Weyrich. I'm President and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation. My question is for all the candidates. What do you intend to do to counteract the homosexual agenda?

FARAH: Ambassador Keyes, take a stab at that.

KEYES: I think that, first and foremost, we have to make sure that we defend the natural family, that we pass the amendment that will be required in order to make sure that the strategy of the gay lobby doesn't result in the destruction of traditional marriage.

Second, we have to restore the understanding of what marriage is. I heard tonight a shocking statement, that somehow the state can withdraw its respect for and support for the natural family, as ordained by God.

I would like to remind you that the family preceded the government. Before we had a government, we had a God-ordained family that supported and represented the natural rights of our humanity, and the government is obliged to respect those natural rights, not to destroy them.

So, I think it will important to restore that understanding which supports our reasonable belief that the family ordained by God, and tied in its mission to procreation that represents our bond to our posterity, must be respected under law and understood by the American people in terms of that respect.

FARAH: Representative Hunter.

HUNTER: Well, I think I like Alan's idea that the most important thing we can do is to support that bedrock of this country, and that is the American family, the traditional family. Certainly we have all said that we would very strongly support a constitutional amendment for one man and one woman.

I think beyond that, we have important institutions in this country that we most support and fortify and continue to support and fortify. One of them is the military. We had a major fight a couple of years ago to allow practicing homosexuals into the military. I led the opposition to that attempt, and I think it's only because we have been able to resist that particular attempt that we have the very best military in the world today.

I think also, institutions like the Boy Scouts should be maintained, and every American family should have the right to say it's a matter of moral principle that we do not accept homosexual activity.

FARAH: Dr. Paul.

PAUL: All rights are individuals. We do not get our rights because we belong to a group. Whether it's homosexual women, minorities, it leads us astray. So, it's much more important to understand that all individuals have the right to their life. If they do no harm, you don't try to do a whole lot about it. If you want to change people, you change them through persuasion, through family values and church values, but you can't do it through legislation because force doesn't work.

But there should be  though you don't get your rights belonging to your group. A group can't force themselves on anybody else. So there should be no affirmative action for any group. So if homosexual groups want to enforce their way on us, there's no right to do that, either. But at the same time, you should eradicate all these hate laws. These hate laws indicate that there's something subjective in hate laws, that some people would receive a different penalty on others.

This violates the principle on the importance of the individual, and confuses us about the importance of individual rights, which is the purpose of the Constitution. Defend our individual rights.

FARAH: Senator Brownback.

BROWNBACK: I liked Duncan Hunter's statement, and I want to associate myself with that, and I fight for those same sort of issues in the Senate. I want to point something out that's the difference between the parties. General Peter Pace, recent chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stood up for the "don't ask, don't tell" policy in the United States when criticized for that. And he just said, "You know, it's the policy. It's something I think that is very clear." It was part of his faith, and he believed that this was the right thing to stand up for.

Every Democrat presidential candidate condemned him for saying that, and I stood up for General Pace, because we should stand up for other people when they will stand up for these basics that's saying that "don't ask, don't tell" is a good policy, and it's saying that this is the right thing for us to do in the military.

And also on the hate crimes legislation. This is something we have got to fight against, that somehow that the thought is what the crime is, and that being moved into an agenda not allowing people to speak their beliefs about homosexuality.

FARAH: John Cox.

COX: I agree with Sam. I agree with Duncan and Alan. Let me add a few notes of common sense to this whole thing. You know, this is a free country, and we have to respect people's freedom to do what they want to do. But you know what? We don't have to sanction it. We don't have to sanction behavior. We don't have to support it financially. And we don't need to put more rights that will create more litigation in this country. The last thing we need in this country is more litigation from rights.

We also have this problem with transvestites who want to be school teachers. Well, I gotta tell you. What the Republican Party needs to stand for is school choice and home-schooling, so that we can keep our children in the schools of our choice, and we won't have to deal with that.

I don't know that we help ourselves when we try to moralize to a large part of the country that is not a believer like us. I think we need to use common sense. We certainly need to stand up for the proper behavior, we absolutely need to do that, but we need to use common sense, and talk about the fact that we can't open the floodgates to polygamy and bestiality and all kinds of other things. Kids, hold your ears.

FARAH: Representative Tancredo.

TANCREDO: I believe that we have all explained what it is that a president can do under these circumstances, what they can do about this particular issue. And, again, it is restrained. And it is constrained by the Constitution, and appropriately so. I certainly agree with that.

I mean, you cannot  an individual or a president of the United States simply can't make a rule, sign an executive order changing the morality of the country. It can't happen that way. You do so by leadership, as I said before.

Also, I agree with John on this issue in particular, in terms of schooling. You know, when you look at the agenda that we are talking about here, where does it manifest itself? It is in the curriculum in the schools throughout this country. There is a very strong movement to influence the curriculum in the schools to obtain some sort of moral neutrality on all issues, including homosexuality. Well, how can you stop that? I'll tell you how. I believe completely in the idea of school choice. I actually introduced a voucher system when I was in Colorado in 1992. It is up to the parent, it is up to them to control that school environment. That's where it begins.

FARAH: Governor Huckabee.

HUCKABEE: Well, I'm convinced that the reason the homosexual movement has become so strong is because the traditional family has become weak. When over half the marriages in this country end in divorce, it's hard for a lot of kids to grow up seeing the role models that kids need in order to become the replacements for those of use who are parents now.

The basic purpose of a parent is to train his replacement. Where are kids going to learn what a family looks like, what a marriage looks like, if most the marriages in this country end in divorce?

I want us to be very careful that we don't come across as having some type of animosity or hatred toward people, even those whose lifestyles are inexplicable to us. But by the same token, as a Christian, we are obligated to stand for that institution that is the only institution from which there really is the definition of family, and that's mothers and fathers, husbands and wives, people related by blood, marriage, or adoption.

FARAH: Well, that concludes Round One this evening. Let's give all of the candidates a round of applause.

[ROUND TWO]

FARAH: There will not be any breaks, however. We are moving right into the second round. This will be a series of yes or no questions, some from the panel, some from the panel, some from other distinguished leaders who will be joining me here at the podium. And after each question is asked, the candidates will turn on one of two lights on their podiums. If their answer is yes, they will turn on a green light. If their answer is no, they will turn on a red light. Just so everyone knows and is clear, you can't turn on both. That is not a valid option.

We want this to be a speed round, so I ask the audience to hold applause until the end. And gentlemen, don't forget to turn off your lights after each question, so we can use them once again.

All right. Let's start with the panel.

BUDDY SMITH: Thank you, Joseph. Recently, a federal just ordered the Indiana legislature to censor their prayers. Specifically, the federal judge ordered the Indiana legislature to never allow anyone to offer an invocation prayer in Jesus' name. Will you as president consider impeachment a possible remedy for this judicial activism?

FOLGER: The Mexico City Policy states that as a condition for a foreign organization to receive federal funds, they will neither, quote, "perform nor actively promote abortion." Would you work to apply this Mexico City policy to organizations within the United States as well as abroad?

HUCKABEE: I just want to clarify, and I'm not trying to be difficult, but I want to make sure we're not being asked to apply a Mexican law to United States law. Is it the principle you are after, or the law itself?

FOLGER: It's the principle of not giving our tax dollars to organizations within our country that actively promote or provide abortions.

HUCKABEE: OK. I just want to make sure that we were not in essence agreeing to abide by a Mexican law.

FOLGER: No. It's an American law.

HUCKABEE: OK. All right.

BROWNBACK: This is a policy that Ronald Reagan put in place, that we wouldn't use federal funds to support abortion or organizations that promote abortions overseas.

HUNTER: It's actually a U.N. policy.

KEYES: Well, actually, it was a policy of the Mexico City Population Conference. I was the deputy chairman of the delegation. I actually negotiated the language into the final resolution at that conference.

[audience: strong reaction, cheers]

FOLGER: Could I just . . .? Joseph? May I clarify?

FARAH: It's interesting that there's disagreement, and you all voted the same way.

FOLGER: I want to know, will they defund Planned Parenthood. That's what I want to know. [To Huckabee:] Is that a no?

HUCKABEE: Would I fund Planned Parenthood?

FOLGER: Will you defund Planned Parenthood?

HUCKABEE: Oh, defund it. Yes. I thought you said would I fund it, and that would be a no.

RABBI SPERO: Do you agree that the excessive and overbearing use by liberals of multiculturalism is weakening the unique American culture that has historically shaped the identity of America, and will lead to a harmful balkanization and unnecessary divisions among the citizenry?

SCHLAFLY: Will you oppose all plans for amnesty, path to citizenship, guest workers, and seasonal passes until the very high unemployment rate of our own minority youth and college and high school students seeking summer jobs, has dropped to 5%?

Phyllis, I agree on opposing amnesty. On the guest worker provision, I think there are places, and particularly in industries like agriculture, that we should use guest worker programs, and have ones that would work. I think this is something that we need to work on, and I think we need to work on together as a society. So, I agree on amnesty, that I oppose amnesty, but I think on guest worker programs, we should look at those.

I would also point out, I am for securing the border, and I think the American public has voted very clearly and spoken very clearly on securing the border and enforcing the worksite. But I think the guest worker programs have not worked, they are not working, and they need to be revised  in particularly, say, the agriculture sector, we need these programs, and they need those in certain areas. And that's why I voted the way I did on this.

COX: Joe, can I use one of my . . . ?

FARAH: You certainly may.

COX: To respond to my good friend Sam. I oppose amnesty because it doesn't work. It's not going to solve the problem. It's only going to encourage more illegal behavior. I also oppose a guest worker program, and I heard Mrs. Schlafly give a very eloquent speech on this, and she was dead-on right. We don't want to create a second class of citizens in this country. We want people who come to America to ultimately be Americans. At the same time, we ought to make sure that we send the people home who have cut in line, but we've got to make sure that we bring the people in who are waiting in line, and waiting for the bureaucracy ten, fifteen years to get to this country legally.

FARAH: Anyone else want to use a minute?

TANCREDO: Yeah, I do, as a matter of fact. Listen, amnesty is the worst possible public policy you can ever have. It rewards illegal behavior, it encourages more of it, and it's a slap in the face of every single person who as done it the right way. We should never, ever have amnesty.

And I'll tell you another thing about guest worker programs. Guest worker programs  you know, it's always used because there is this phrase I hear all the time. And it's an insult to every American. It is this, that they are only coming for jobs no American will take. Right? Well, really what they are saying is  they should add the last part of what they mean  they are coming for jobs that no American will take for the price I can get an illegal alien to perform the job for. That's the real issue.

[audience cheers]

So, no more guest worker. We don't need it. We certainly don't need amnesty. And what I wish all of my colleagues up here would do is have time to and really explain what they would do to the ten to twenty million people who are presently here. You stop their employment, you stop their ability to come, and if they do not go home, you have to deport them because it is the law.

FARAH: We have a series of community leaders joining me here at the podium now to ask the next few questions. Joining me now is Jannique Stewart, of the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education. Jannique?

JANNIQUE STEWART, THE COALITION ON URBAN RENEWAL AND EDUCATION (CURE): My name is Jannique Stewart, and I am standing in for Star Parker with the Coalition on Urban Renewal and Education.

Current estimates for the unfunded liabilities of our Social Security system are as high as ten trillion dollars. Now, with that said, the question is, would you revive President Bush's attempt to introduce personal retirement accounts as a way to reform Social Security, thus allowing all Americans, and particularly low-wage workers and the self-employed, an investment in their future and ownership in the inheritance they pass on?

JUDGE ROY MOORE, FOUNDATION FOR MORAL LAW: Good evening. My name is Judge Roy Moore. I'm President of the Foundation for Moral Law.

[audience: strong reaction, long applause]

Thank you. I'm President of the Foundation for Moral Law, and also founding member of the Coalition to Restore America. My question is, would you support Article III legislation, like the Constitution Restoration Act, that prevents federal courts from hearing lawsuits brought to stop federal and state officials from acknowledging the sovereignty of God in such ways as public prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, and the public display of the Ten Commandments?

HUNTER: You know, Roy, it looks to me like you are ahead of all of us in the polls.

[audience cheers]

You may accept the nomination. But you know something? At the first Constitutional Convention in 1787 when they couldn't get together, and Ben Franklin moved that they began each session with a prayer with the supplication to God, and George Washington was said to have beamed and to have loved that, and James Madison seconded the motion. I guess my question to the liberals, to the liberal activist judges who say that the Constitution doesn't allow that, doesn't allow reference to God or to His direction, just what part of the U.S. Constitution and the interpretation by George Washington, James Madison, and Benjamin Franklin don't those liberal judges agree with?

PHILLIP JAUREGUI, JUDICIAL ACTION GROUP (JAG): Good evening, gentlemen. I'm Phillip Jauregui with JAG  Judicial Action Group. My question is, if elected president, will you nominate only judges and justices who are demonstrably faithful to the judicial role of following only the text of the Constitution, and who not only refuse to legislate from the bench, but are committed to reversing prior court decision where activist judges strayed from the judicial role and legislated from the bench?

FARAH: Thank you, gentlemen. Just a reminder. You can clear your lights now, and after each question.

The next question is on videotape, if you would like to turn around and look at the screen.

CHAPLAIN GORDON JAMES KLINGENSCHMITT, PERSUADE THE WORLD: Hello, gentlemen. My name is Chaplain Gordon James Klingenschmitt, I'm a former Navy chaplain who was punished for praying in Jesus' name, punished for quoting the Bible inside the chapel, one of 68 chaplains now suing the Secretary of the Navy. And here's my question: over 300,000 Americans have signed a petition, over 75 congressmen and 35 pro-family groups have requested an executive order to protect a military chaplain's right to pray according to the dictates of his conscience, and enforce the law that's been on the books since 1860. If you were elected president of the United States, will you sign this executive order to protect military chaplain's right to pray, according to their faith?

VIC ELIASON, VCY AMERICA: Good evening. My Name is Vic Eliason. I am the Vice President of the VCY America Radio Network. I also host a radio talk show that is heard coast-to-coast on 85 radio stations every day. As a Christian, I don't want to be forced by the government to broadcast morally objectionable material or give equal time to opponents of our faith, in order to comply with someone else's idea of "fairness." If elected, would you veto any legislation that contains language of the so called "Fairness Doctrine?"

HUNTER: Yeah, let me get another one in. I'm on a role here. The liberals want to be able to cut into every conservative talk show and have their say, and actually, they can be on the air as much as they want, if they can get people to do one thing: turn on the dial. But you know something, there is a place for the Fairness Doctrine, and that is that we need to be able to get the Taliban to confess, and if we sentence them to listening to Al Franken on his radio show, we're going to be able to make the Fairness Doctrine work.

[audience laughs]

FARAH: All right. Clear those lights, and we'll bring on our next questioner.

JAMES LANSBERRY, SAMARITAN MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL: Good evening, gentlemen. My name is James Lansberry, and I'm the Vice President of Samaritan Ministries International. Nations with socialized medicine reduced the cost of their healthcare systems by restricting patience access that needed treatments and healthcare rationing. Will you protect the availability of needed medical care by opposing current efforts to subject Americans to government-mandated health insurance and universal coverage?

FARAH: All right. Thank you very much, and clear your screens. Our next questioner is on videotape, so you might want to look at the screen.

ARLENE ELSHINNAWY: My name is Arlene Elshinnawy and I'm a 75-year-old grandmother who exercised my First Amendment rights on a public sidewalk in Philadelphia on October 10, 2004. I was arrested, jailed, and was charged under Pennsylvania's hate crimes law. I faced up to 47 years in prison plus a $90,000 fine for attempting to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ at a homosexual pride event with those who are trapped in bondage to that lifestyle. People shouldn't go to jail for sharing the Gospel. If elected, can we count on you to veto any so-called "hate crimes" legislation?

FARAH: All right. Thank you, and clear those lights. And we have one more video question.

AARON CHAMBLEE: My name is Aaron. In Fiscal Year 2006, the U.S. government spent $406 billion dollars of our money just on interest payments to the holders of the national debt  which is now $8.8 trillion. I don't have that kind of money. If elected, will you rein in this out-of-control spending and work hard to balance the budget?

COX: Because that was too good to pass up. As a matter of fact, when I campaign all over Iowa and New Hampshire, I see kids and I go up to them and I say, "Did you know you are $30,000 in debt already?" And they look at me, and they say, "What's debt?"

But you know what? To be serious for a moment, it goes to the reason why I'm doing what I'm doing, because it's immoral to put our children in debt. I'm sorry, but the career politicians in Washington who have spent your money to get elected year, after year, after year continue to pile debt onto our children, and it can't continue at this rate. We have got to do something about it, and talking about it isn't just going to get it done. We have got to get results. We have got to have a national will to reform government, reform our spending practices, reform the idea that we're just going to spend money so that people can use it to get reelected. That's important. You know, we've got a decent economy out there, 4.6% unemployment. The stock market is at 13.500 or so. But people have a palpable fear. And I think there's part of it that's an economic fear of this crushing debt, and the idea that we are going to leave this to our children. It can't happen.

Thank you. Currently, my husband sits in solitary confinement in a federal prison, having served eight months of an eleven-year sentence for wounding and illegal alien who was resisting arrest while smuggling 750 lbs of marijuana in our country. The drug smuggler was given immunity from prosecution for the drugs he was carrying. He was given free health care and free border crossing cards by our government, and is suing the government now for 5 million dollars. My question is, is this the kind of border enforcement policy we would expect in your administration?

BOBBY SCHINDLER, TERRI'S FIGHT: Good evening. My name is Bobby Schindler, and I'm with the Terri Schindler-Schiavo Foundation.

[applause]

My beloved sister Terri Schiavo was starved and dehydrated to death, in the land of abundance. The world watched because she was disabled and unable to speak for herself. My question is, would you pursue or support legislation that would protect the cognitively disabled and vulnerable people with from being dehydrated to death by having their food and water taken away?

RICK SCARBOROUGH, VISION AMERICA: My name is Rick Scarborough. I am a pastor, and I represent a national coalition of pastors as president of Vision America.

[applause]

America is drowning in a growing cesspool of pornographic smut. The Bush justice department is reticent to prosecute any but the worst hardcore pornographers  and most often, only the smaller companies that produce such filth. Meanwhile, hardcore pornographers have found their way into major hotel chains like the Marriott Hotels, mega-companies like Verizon and Comcast. Would your administration prosecute all illegal adult pornography, including so-called white-collar pornographers? Thank you.

RHONDA HUBBARD: My name is Rhonda Hubbard. This is my husband, Gary, and our children adopted as embryos, Joshua Luke and Rachel Grace, and they were snowflake babies, which means that for the first part of their lives, they were frozen embryos. Can you look at them now and honestly tell me that it would be OK with you if someone used them in medical experiments and snuffed out their little lives? Is that your position?

TOM DEROSA, CREATION STUDIES INSTITUTE: Good evening. My name is Tom DeRosa. I'm the president of the Creation Studies Institute.

[applause]

Today, as in the past, academic freedom has been threatened when questioning the theory of evolution, as in the case of the Iowa State astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez. His tenure was denied because of his work in intelligent design this May 2007. Censoring alternative theories and punishing those who hold them, dogmatic indoctrination, has replaced scientific methods of inquiry. Will your office support and encourage a more open approach to education and the presentation of scientific facts that contradict the theory of evolution?

Our question this evening is, currently the broadcast indecency rules only apply to local broadcast stations. Do you support and believe that broadcast indecency rules should be expanded to cable networks as well?

STEPHEN BENNET, FORMER HOMOSEXUAL: Good evening, gentlemen. My name is Stephen Bennett, and I'm a former homosexual. I used to think I was born gay, and was sexually active in the homosexual lifestyle for over eleven years. Now, because of Jesus Christ, my Savior, I'm happily married for almost fifteen years to my beautiful wife, Irene, and we have two precious children.

[applause]

Homosexual behavior is immoral and dangerous. I know. Many of my friends today, both male and female, are dead. Even so, schools across the nation teach our children that homosexuality is healthy, normal, and unchangeable. I'm living proof that's not true. As president would you support legislation ensuring that schools forfeit federal funding if they expose our children to homosexual propaganda that puts them at risk?

COX: Can we do away with the Department of Education, and forfeit all funding?

[applause]

FARAH: Thank you very much. Next question.

ALEX HARRIS, THEREBELUTION.COM: My name is Alex Harris. I'm 18. The National Institutes of Health reports that one in five Americans has a sexually-transmitted disease, affecting one out of every four sexually-active teens. Without even addressing teen pregnancy abortion rates, it's clear that our public policies have not protected my peers. Meanwhile, 2.5 million American teens like me have taken public abstinence pledges, to save sex until marriage  the only 100%-proven effective solution and prevention for STDs.

[applause]

In the interest of fairness and effectiveness, would you bring abstinence-education funding onto equal ground with contraceptive-based education? Thank you.

FARAH: And thank you. Our next question is coming to us via videotape.

SIMON DENG, FORMER SLAVE FROM SUDAN: I was made a slave during the government of Sudan's war against black Christians of southern Sudan. I am a slave no longer, but today want to free tens of thousands of my brothers and sisters who remain in chattel slavery in Sudan. Would you today endorse the creation of a commission to monitor the eradication of slavery in Sudan, where the slavery of a man is legal?

RICHARD THOMPSON, THOMAS MORE LAW CENTER: Good evening. My name is Richard Thompson, President of the Thomas More Law Center, a national public-interest law firm. The ACLU has challenged the Mt. Soledad cross, the centerpiece of a war memorial located in San Diego, because it is a Christian religious symbol  a cross honoring our war dead that sits atop Sunrise Rock in the federally-owned Mojave National Preserve. My question to you is this: if you are elected President, will you take steps to preserve our national war memorials and landmarks which contain Christian symbols from organization like the ACLU who seek to purge all religious symbols from the public square?

TIM BONO, ARLINGTON VIRGINIA: Good evening. My name is Tim Bono. I own a motion picture film lab that came under fire by the Arlington Human Rights Commission because I refused to duplicate objectionable pro-homosexual material. If elected president, would you protect business owners like me from being forced to violate our moral conscience by vetoing the so-called "Employment Non-Discrimination Act" and any other legislation that would add the phrase "sexual orientation" into federal law?

PASTOR MARK HOLICK, WICHITA, KANSAS: Hello, my name is Pastor Mark Holick from Wichita, Kansas. I and my church are currently under investigation by the IRS for "political involvement" due to my identifying politicians who support the destruction of innocent unborn children. If you were elected president, would you remove the gag rule from pastors like me and support a repeal of the portion of IRS Code Section 501(c)(3) that restricts churches and ministries from expressing our biblical convictions for or against a candidate?

COX: Let's get rid of the entire Internal Revenue Code while we're at it.

KEN BECKER, TRUCKER: Good evening, gentlemen. My name is Ken Becker. I'm from Texas, and as a small-business trucker for over fifteen years, I know that allowing Mexican trucks into our country brings unsafe equipment driven by people unable to communicated in English, read highway signs, or ever know our laws. This creates a serious safety concern and undermines American jobs  not to mention the roads and bridges. They [Mexican trucks] are a threat to security, safety, and American workers. Since Bill Clinton successfully kept Mexican trucks off U.S. highways, will you rescind President Bush's order to allow hundreds of Mexican trucks to be driven on U.S. highways and roads?

CHRISTIE GLESENER, SHOFAR INTERNATIONAL: Good evening. My name is Christie Glesener, and I'm president of a Shofar International foundation. We are a humanitarian aid organization to Israel and other nations. Past American presidents have expected Israel to give up land, not for peace but for the promise of peace. With this mindset, President Bush introduced the "roadmap" in April of 2003. Israel has evacuated many of her lands, yet sixty terrorist acts are attempted and three hundred rockets fall every month in Israel. Still, the U.S. continues to pressure Israel to relinquish her lands, divide her cities, with no recourse against the Palestinian, Hamas, and terrorist groups. If elected president, will you solidly stand behind Israel to not give up land for unfulfilled promises of peace, even in the face of opposition of allied, European, and Arab countries?

PASTOR BILL DEVLIN, REDEEM THE VOTE: I'm Pastor Bill Devlin, of Redeem the Vote and also Calvary Chapel, Philadelphia. It's good to see all my friends here tonight. Healthcare is growing at an accelerating rate, and it is estimated to consume up to 17% of our Gross National Product, if present trends in healthcare consumption continue. It appears that lifestyles that are based in moral principles would reduce healthcare expenditures. Would you support a private healthcare approach that rewards behavior that promotes moral lifestyles  that is, avoiding alcohol and tobacco consumption, as well as obesity reduction, exercise and nutrition that promotes health?

FATHER KEITH RODERICK, CHRISTIAN SOLIDARITY INTERNATIONAL: I'm Father Keith Roderick of Christian Solidarity International. U.S. policy has thus far failed Christians and other non-Muslim minorities in Iraq. As their numbers dwindle under continued persecution, threats, and violence, their very existence is threatened. This would be a tragic and ironic outcome of Iraq's liberation. Gentlemen, would you as president support their political goals by endorsing the creation of an autonomous administrative area in their ancestral homeland of the Nineveh plains, as permitted by Article 125 of the Iraqi Constitution?

TOM WHITE, VOICE OF MARTYRS: Good evening. I'm Tom White, Director of the Voice of the Martyrs.

[applause]

Today, Christians are being beaten, jailed, and expelled throughout the Muslim world. The Washington Post reported that in Saudi Arabia, no church buildings are permitted, yet Saudi extremist Wahhabis have built hundreds of mosques in the United States with funding from Saudi Arabia. If elected, will you take action to protest these gross injustices and persecution by denying visas or imposing trade sanctions? Thank you.

HUCKABEE: GREEN (yes)

TANCREDO: GREEN (yes)

COX: GREEN (yes)

BROWNBACK: GREEN (yes)

PAUL: RED (no)

HUNTER: RED (no)

KEYES: GREEN (yes)

FATHER THOMAS J. EUTENEUER, S.T.L., HUMAN LIFE INTERNATIONAL: Good evening, gentlemen. I'm Father Tom Euteneuer from Human Life International.

[applause]

Thank you. At the 1994 U.N. International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, the Clinton administration put the full force of U.S. government to make abortion a universal human right, with such proposals as the U.N. treaty on the rights of the child, the so-called convention against the discrimination against women, known as CEDAW, and thankfully the Bush administration changed our delegation to the U.N., and stopped supporting the abortion agenda. Now my question: will you promise to oppose all U.N. treaties that could be used to promote abortion as a human right?

JAMIE RUSSELL, STUDENT: My name is Jamie, I'm 17, and I'm the product of school choice. I grew up in the public schools and recommended in the 7th grade for the third time, because of my deficiency in math and English. My mother then sent me to New Generation, a Christian school. After one year, my math improved five grade levels, and my English improved three years. Today, I am now pursuing a nursing career. The Democratic presidential candidates supported school choice for their children. Question: will you support school choice for other students like me with similar tax-credit programs?

PASTOR REZA SAFA: Good evening, gentlemen. My name is Pastor Reza Safa. I am a former radical Shiite Muslim from Iran. U.S. policy of extending student visas to foreign students has been much too lenient. Many of the 9/11 hijackers received student visas. Thousands of students are on American campuses from countries that promote Islamic terrorism  ten thousand from Saudi Arabia alone  with U.S. agreement to increase that to 21,000. As president, would you support continued issuing of student visas to nationals of countries that are state-sponsors of terrorist groups? Thank you.

BROWNBACK: I sure think we ought to limit a lot of these, but I don't think you can go and just block them altogether. That's the trouble that I have with the overall statement in that. I think there ought to be a lot more limitations with it.

FARAH: OK. Unfortunately, you are out of time.

[audience: laughs]

Thank you. Next question.

HUNTER: [To Brownback:] How did you sneak that one in? [laughs]

BOB FU, CHINA AID ASSOCIATION: Good evening. My name is Pastor Bob Fu, President of China Aid Association. My Chinese friend, Sarah Lu, was forced to make Christmas lights for Americans, while in labor camps for six years, where she was sent for the crime of being a Christian house church leader. Thousands of prisoners of conscience like Sarah are forced to manufacture items that stock our American shelves. At the same time, American manufacturing jobs are being moved to China, because businesses can't compete with slave labor and wages as low as $.30 an hour. If elected, would you make future trade with China contingent on them measurably improving their record on religious freedom and human rights, eliminating their unfair trade practices, slave labor, and the substandard policies that poison our food, toothpaste, and toys? Thank you.

JUDGE MOORE: As President of the Foundation of Moral Law, and the founding member of the coalition to restore America, I have a second question oriented more toward the second organization I represent. As president, do you support the NAFTA "Superhighway" presently under construction from Mexico to Canada, portions of which shall be under foreign control?

MAT STAVER, LIBERTY COUNCIL: Good evening. I'm Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of the Liberty Council, a national public interest law firm, which is the opposite of the ACLU.

[applause]

President Ronald Reagan rejected the treaty, the Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST), because it gives International Seabed Authority dictatorial power to regulate all oceans and the riches at the bottom of the oceans, plus the power the levy international taxes, and it would make the United States subject to the decisions of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The Law of the Sea Treaty was recently  and probably will come to the vote of the Senate as it was recently resurrected. Would you urge the Senate not to ratify this treaty, if you were elected president?

FARAH: Thank you. Next question. I'm sorry. That concluded Round Two. I'm very sorry; that question will be out in Round Three. Let's give the candidates a great hand for the way they handled that. And furthermore, because we're making such excellent time, because you're following the rules so well, we're going to extend the answers to two minutes, in this final round.

This round will be a series of open-ended questions, directed at one candidate. Each candidate will receive one question. If another candidate wants to add his opinion on that question, he has the option of using one of his extra minutes. You might want to note where you are on that. Some of you are out of extra minutes at this time, so let's begin the third round.

[ROUND THREE]

THERESA IPPOLITI, ABORTION SURVIVOR: [Question to Mayor Rudolph Giuliani] My name is Theresa Ippoliti. Eighteen years ago, an abortionist was hired to kill me, but he failed. Nuns came and rescued me and took me to the hospital, where I stayed for two months. My heroic parents then adopted me.

Mayor Giuliani, your position on abortion would have left me dead. Now that you see me, Mayor Giuliani, do you honestly believe that an abortionist had a right to kill me?

MAYOR RUDOLPH GIULIANI: [absent from podium]

FARAH: Silence. Next question. Phyllis, are you up?

SCHLAFLY: [Question to Hunter] Yeah. All right. This is a question for Congressman Hunter. The United States has lost millions of manufacturing and other good jobs because of bad trade agreements and our government letting foreign governments get by with unfair trade practices. What will you do to stop the "outsourcing" of good American jobs, and the loss of American jobs at home, from "insourcing" foreign workers through H-1B and other special visas?

HUNTER: Thank you, Phyllis. One thing American presidents do is to enforce trade laws, and we're not enforcing our trade laws, particularly with Communist China, and this country has lost more than one million high-paying manufacturing jobs to China alone. And with the rest of the world, we signed this deal after World War II, called the GATT agreement, that basically allows every country in the world to trade with us, to rebate their taxes to their manufacturers, and every country has that right, except for one country: the United States of America.

So, the first thing I would do is to enforce our trade laws with Communist China, stop them from cheating on trade, bring back high-paying manufacturing jobs to this country.

And you know something else? You know, China is buying with American billions, and they have a two hundred-plus trade surplus over the U.S. They are buying ships, and planes, and military equipment. And a couple of years ago, when our guys started to get hurt with roadside bombs in Iraq, as the Armed Services Chairman, I sent out to find one company left in America that could still make high-grade armor steel plates. We only found one company left that could do that. So, we're not only shipping high-paying manufacturing jobs to China, and losing good jobs that could be helping American families, but we're also giving to a potential adversary the equipment that one day our people may face on the battlefield.

So, I will enforce American trade rules with China, and I will level the playing field with the rest of the world, and I will bring back high-paying manufacturing jobs to this country. And let me tell you, when you push a manufacturing job worth $75,000 a year  and this goes to some other questions  when you push that offshore, and you replace that with a $15,000 or $20,000 job, that drops off the cliff the amount of money that goes to Social Security, Medicare, and all of the other government incomes that we're going to rely on.

So, I will enforce the rules with China, and I will level the playing field.

FARAH: Our next question is for Governor Romney, who is not here, and that'll be from Buddy Smith of the 

HUNTER: I'll take his question.

FARAH: [laughs]  American Family Association. OK, it's from Pete LaBarbera. That's what I said. [laughs]

PETER LABARBERA, AMERICANS FOR TRUTH: [Question to Governor Mitt Romney] I'm Peter LaBarbera with Americans for Truth about Homosexuality. Governor Romney, it looks like you've lost some weight.

[laughter]

Governor Romney, you are running as a pro-life and pro-marriage candidate, but you have a history of being strongly pro-abortion-on-demand and pro-homosexual. You supported Roe v. Wade, and said abortion should be, quote, "safe and legal."

In 2002, you opposed a state constitutional amendment that would have stopped homosexual so-called "marriage" in Massachusetts. You said homosexuals should be allowed in the Boy Scouts of America, and as governor, you officially celebrated "Gay-Straight Youth Pride Day"  whatever that is. You sat on Marriott's Board of Directors for ten years while it profited off the sale of hard-core pornographic videos to its guests.

My question is, why should voters trust you, after you spent so much of your career aggressively promoting anti-life and anti-family positions? I understand a change of heart, but a change of position on life, marriage, gun control, pornography, and immigration all preceding your run for president?

GOVERNOR MITT ROMNEY: [absent from podium]

FARAH: [sarcastically] "Yeah, so what?"

Now, we have Buddy Smith from the American Family Association.

SMITH: [Question to Brownback] My question is for Senator Brownback. Senator Brownback, we appreciate your work on pro-family issues in the United States Senate.

BROWNBACK: Thank you.

SMITH: However, we are seeking clarification of your support for allowing illegal aliens to remain here  which amounts to amnesty  and for bringing in more so-called "guest workers." Please specifically address the depressed wages and reduced availability of entry-level jobs for our citizens caused by these foreign workers.

BROWNBACK: I think the issue, as far as the depressed wages  that's a tax issue, more than anything else. We've got too high of a tax rate. We've got too much taxes that we're taking from the American public, and that's what's depressing our wages, a lot more than anything else.

But on the specific issue of immigration that you're asking about  and this is an issue I've wrastled with for a long time. I appreciate your acknowledgment of the work I've done on some of the family life issues. Many of the bills that we talked about in here, or people were asked about, are my bills in the United States Senate. And I'm delighted to work with all of you and with all of your groups to move this agenda forward, because I believe it. I believe this is important, that we get life, and marriage, and family, and the future of the country right.

So, when it comes to immigration and wrestling with that issue  and I serve on the Judiciary Committee, and I serve on the Immigration Subcommittee of the Judiciary  the difficulty here was to look at how we could balance a rule-of-law nation, and being a compassionate society at the same time, and get the law moving forward.

And we're all God's children, here and other places overseas. I talk about being "pro-life and whole life." Every child is sacred, at every stage. Sacred in the womb, it's sacred in poverty, it's sacred in Darfur.

I think we've got to enforce the laws. That's why I voted for border control. I voted for the fence. I voted for integration of the Social Security and immigration, so we can get enforcement that at the jobsite. I also think that people are not opposed to legal immigration. They're opposed to illegal immigration. People support legal immigration. They oppose illegal immigration. And that's why I think you have to work with, like, a guest worker program, as I cited earlier to Phyllis' comment.

Now, people disagree, and it is a hot topic. And I voted against the immigration bill this year. Voted against going to cloture on it. The American public has spoken clearly, what they want to see done is enforce the law, period. We'll look at the rest of this later.

STAVER: [Question to Senator Fred Thompson] Senator Thompson, I wish you were here tonight to answer my question. I'm Mat Staver, and this is a question I would ask you seriously to consider an answer to.

While you were Senator, you opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment, but recently you stated that you would support a marriage amendment that would prevent judges from imposing same-sex marriage, so long as it would not prohibit state legislatures from adopting same-sex marriage. This reasoning is like saying that you favor a constitutional amendment that prohibits judges from imposing slavery, so long as the state legislatures were free to do so.

Does not your position fundamentally misunderstand the universal importance of marriage, in the same way my latter example about slavery indicates a misunderstanding about human dignity?

SENATOR FRED THOMPSON: [absent from podium]

FARAH: All right. Our next questioner, Janet Folger, asking a question of Senator John McCain.

FOLGER: [Question to Senator John McCain] Senator McCain, I know you know you were invited, because your office called several times to say, "Stop the phone calls. We've shut down the campaign. We can't make outgoing calls, there's so many coming in encouraging us to come to the debate," which  I just want to remind you  that all those calls are all those voters. Just a little reminder.

But my question to you, Senator McCain, is this. I was troubled by the lawsuit that you and other members of Congress filed against Wisconsin Right to Life for airing radio and television ads to encourage the public to lobby their senators to oppose the filibuster of the judicial candidates. While, thankfully, Wisconsin Right to Life won the lawsuit, was it really your goal to gag and prevent groups from being involved in the legislative process during the "no free speech zones" 60 days before a general election, and 30 days prior to a primary election, as your campaign finance reform law required?

SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN: [absent from podium]

FARAH: Next up is Pastor Doug Sauder. And, he's going to be asking a question of John Cox.

COX: Yes, thank you for inviting me. You had more courage than all the networks combined. Thank you.

PASTOR SAUDER: [Question to Cox] You mentioned earlier that you were a CEO in the private sector, and you're not that well known in the campaign, so what should make us take your candidacy seriously?

COX: Well, Doug, that's a good question in many ways, because it goes to the essence of our democracy. Are we gonna focus on substance, or are we gonna focus on celebrities? 'Cause I submit, if we want to just elect celebrities, maybe we ought to elect Paris Hilton, or Jesse Ventura, or O.J. Simpson. He's in the news a lot, lately.

I'm a CEO, as you said, and the presidency is the chief executive of this country. The president is charged with getting things done, getting results, building a team, hiring people, firing people if need be, setting goals, monitoring those goals, making sure those goals are consistent with the wishes of the people, because that's, after all, who the chief executive works for, just like a chief executive of a company works for his shareholders.

These are all good people. And the Democrats, I assume they're good people. But you know what? Very few if any of them have even worked at a hot dog stand, let alone run one, and the idea that we're going to turn over a three trillion dollar enterprise to that kind of experience is just unfathomable to me. And you know what? I don't want to see it.

I'm one of you. I'm a political activist. I was president of the Cook County Republican Party. And you don't get any more Republican, being president of the Cook County Republican Party. But I want something better in 2008. I want real results. I want competence brought back to government. I want a president that has experience managing and providing a foundation for this country to move forward.

For twenty years, we've had career political families  Bushes and Clintons. I think that as a nation of three hundred million people, we could find somebody else besides a Bush and a Clinton to run this country, and you know what? It would be my mission to bring other business executives in who would have the same drive and the same love of the country that I do. That's why you should take me seriously.

FARAH: All right. Our next questioner is Rick Scarborough, and that question will be directed to Mike Huckabee.

SCARBOROUGH: [Question to Huckabee] Good to see you this evening, Governor Huckabee. Who would have believed, thirty years ago, while we were sitting in southwestern seminary, we would be in a setting like this tonight?

Few value voters question your views on key social issues, but you have received much criticism from some in conservative circles for doing too little to restrain the growth of government, and for raising taxes in Arkansas, while you were governor. How do you respond to this?

HUCKABEE: With the truth, Rick. With the truth. I cut taxes 94 times as governor. I actually signed the first-ever broad-based tax cut in the 160-year history of our state, and I did that going uphill against the wind, because 90% of the legislature was Democrat, when I became governor in 1996.

As governor, I didn't have the joy, the pleasure, or frankly, the dubious honor, of what members of Congress can do, and that is print money or even just borrow money. We have to live within our budget. I think the federal government ought to do the same thing.

Of a budget that only had 9% margin, after we paid for education, Medicaid, and prisons  the three basic necessities of government  only 9% was left in the general revenue budget. I cut 11% during the recession.

The fact is, if people will look at our record, what they'll find is not only I cut taxes repeatedly as a governor, but I managed the state in such a way that, after ten and a half years of executive experience, more than any other person running for president, more than Rudy Giuliani had as mayor, the fact is that we left that state with an 850 million dollar surplus, no deficit. And the spending that we held was held within one half of one percent per year, for ten and a half years, unless you factor in several pass-throughs, and many of the criticisms have come from people who simply don't understand the nuances of the state budget.

Let's go beyond that. What I did do is one thing. That's a good indication of what I would do. But here's what I pledge. I not only support, I would sell the Fair Tax, because I'll tell you something  if we could have a tax that is flat, fair, finite, and family-friendly, we could change the economy of this country, and for those who are pastors who would love to be able to speak freely and clearly, without the IRS getting in their way and telling them what they could preach from their pulpits, you know the simplest way to do it? Get rid of the IRS. Get the Fair Tax, and we'll change the economy in America.

FARAH: Next up from our fearsome panel is Rabbi Spero, and he has a question to be directed to Tom Tancredo.

SPERO: [Question to Tancredo] Congressman Tancredo, we all agree there's a great need to stop illegal immigration. However, what are the most urgent measures needed today in the area of legal immigration?

TANCREDO: Now, I've said in the past, and I know it is quite controversial, but here's what I believe has to happen. I believe we need a time-out. Now, I recognize fully well that the point I try to make, when I talk about this, is always discussed in terms of our heritage, the fact that we are a nation of immigrants, and that we cannot possibly reduce the number of people coming here legally.

But, let me tell you my great concern, and that is this: that, over the history of our nation, we have had a period  I mean, it has been a cyclical process. We have periods of very high immigration rates, followed by very low immigration rates. Believe it or not, we have. And we have used the periods of very low immigration rates to assimilate the people who came during the periods of high immigration.

Well, that phenomenon has not occurred. It has not occurred for forty-some years. It has been a straight upward line, and here's another problem. It's not just that we just, that there's just so many people coming at a given time. It is the fact that, even on our side of the equation, we do not encourage assimilation.

We tell people that we will teach them in a separate language. We produce documents  the federal government produces documents  that are in various languages, if you want to apply for welfare benefits. This is dividing our country. It is balkanizing America.

We are becoming a bilingual nation. This is not good. Bilingualism is a great thing for individuals. A great thing for individuals  a lousy thing for the country. It divides us. It separates us. We have to think about things that will hold us together as a nation.

What are the things that actually connect us? We come from such a wide variety of places. We desperately need some glue that holds us together in this country, and that glue, for one thing, is the English language. So, I think we need a time out until  I'll tell you when. Until we no longer have to "press one for English," and "two for Spanish."

FARAH: Next up is Joe Glover of the Family Policy Network, and his question will be directed to Ron Paul.

GLOVER: [Question to Paul] Dr. Paul, many libertarians oppose laws, at all levels of government, against so-called "same-sex marriages," and other matters such as prostitution and illegal drugs. What is your view?

PAUL: Well, first off, this is a very important question because "libertarian" sometimes is misconstrued. Libertarian means liberty. If you believe in liberty, you are a libertarian. The best libertarians we've ever had in this country were our Founding Fathers. They believed in civil liberties, economic liberties, and they believed in a non-intervention foreign policy. They wanted peace and trade. So, this is all good.

But, the inference here about marriage, and prostitution, and drugs  they never addressed it. There's no federal authority, no federal government authority, no constitutional authority, to deal with those problems. There's no prohibitions for the states to do it, so that is perfectly all right.

But what we as conservatives must remember, if you're willing to use the strong arm of government to regulate things that are negative that you don't like and you find abhorrent, you set the stage for regulating your religion, your schools, and everything else, because that's the principle.

The First Amendment wasn't written to protect non-controversial speech. It was written to protect controversial speech, so we don't lose our right to go to church and run our schools. This is key!

On the issue of drugs, we have spent nearly five hundred billion dollars on the War on Drugs, since the 1970s. Total failure. Some day, we have to admit it. Today, we have the federal government going into states that have legal medical marijuana, arresting people  undermining state laws  arresting people who use marijuana when they're dying with cancer and AIDS, and it's done with, as a compassionate conservative. And it doesn't work.

What it does, it removes the ability to states to do their things, and also introduces the idea that it's the federal government that will get to decide whether we get to take vitamins, and alternative medical care, or whatever. Most of our history, believe it or not, had no drug laws. Prohibition has been an absolute failure for alcohol. Drug addiction is a medical problem. It's not a problem of the law.

FARAH: All right. Our next questioner is Richard Thompson, and he has something to address to Ambassador Keyes.

RICHARD THOMPSON, THOMAS MORE LAW CENTER: [Question to Keyes] Hi, Ambassador. As ambassador to the United Nations, you must have had a first-hand look at the problems that the United States faces in dealing with an organization that is wracked with corruption, that has frequently undermined core American values, such as parental rights and the freedom of our soldiers and leaders from standing trial in international criminal courts.

My question to you is this: you seem to remain a supporter of the United Nations, even though a great many conservatives are not. Do you feel the U.S. is served by its continued participation in the U.N.?

KEYES: First, let me make one thing very clear. I've never been a supporter, per se, of the United Nations. In fact, policies that you describe, in which we've withheld funds from the United Nations, tried to achieve some change in their corruption, took strong stands against everything at the U.N. that assaulted our policies and values, our relationships with countries like Israel  I was there, under Ronald Reagan, championing the battle against the U.N.'s efforts to destroy our values, to destroy our alliances, to destroy our nation.

So, the notion that I was some kind of "supporter" of the United Nations is just a lie. I represented the interests of the United States at the United Nations, for a president who understood those interests, and was not afraid to defend them.

I also understand, however, two things. First of all, when the United Nations was conceived at the end of World War II  and I have to confess that the conception was far, far, far from a perfect one  people were in a devastated world, looking for a way, they thought, to try to make sure that we would never again have such general wars that threatened such global destruction on mankind.

Can I fault these people for what they were trying to do? Can any of us? No, I cannot. But I do fault those who would now, or did then, believe that we can turn over the sovereignty of this nation and of the American people to the United Nations, to the World Trade Organization, to any organization that would substitute for our Constitution, which establishes the right of this people to govern themselves, under God.

So, I want to be very clear. If people are gonna hold it against me because I was in the United Nations holding the line against this country's enemies, then I suppose they are the same people who will hold it against me because I went into Illinois to speak the truth about Barack Obama, one of the people who stands for the most evil positions that the Democratic Party takes. I suppose they will hold it against me because I was willing to raise the banner of every single issue you have heard tonight, long before it was popular. I have been vilified for it, but I'll tell you, I'll defend American sovereignty and God's truth in America, no matter what the cost.

FARAH: Thank you, and that concludes our second round, our "speed round," tonight. And, I've got to tell you  Round Three, that was  not only the best questions that were heard in a presidential debate, but the best questioners. And thank you very much. Thank all the candidates for their responses.

This moves us to our final segment, where we will hear your closing statements, and each of you will begin with two minutes. You'll be given the extra time that you haven't used  for instance, we're gonna start with Governor Huckabee. You'll have a total of four minutes, because you did not use any of your two minutes that you were  your wild-card time. So, let's begin with Governor Huckabee, and we'll move down the line.

HUCKABEE: Well, with four minutes, I have time to take an offering, so I think I'll ask the ushers to come forward at this time.

[audience: laughter]

Believe me, it not only would be familiar to me; it'd be most pleasant if we had a good offering lifted here tonight.

Most of you are here because you care deeply about the values of this country and the culture, and you're called "value voters." As a candidate for president, I'm not just a person who comes and speaks the language of Zion as a second language. For me, it's a native tongue.

There are a lot of people running for president  every one of them are going to come to you and tell you they're with you, but are they? Many of them will come to you. I come from you. Before I got into politics, I was a pastor. Some love to try to hold that up to some level of ridicule. I wear it as a badge of honor, because I spent my adult life dealing with people of every walk of life, and there's not a social pathology in this country I couldn't put a name and a face to, because those were the people I dealt with.

I ran for office for the same reason that many of you got involved in politics. I love this country. It's been great for me. I'm not a kid who came up blue blood. I came up blue collar, with a father who had to work two jobs just to get enough money to pay the rent on the little rent house we lived in in Hope, Arkansas. We weren't an important family, but we had the importance of knowing that, in this country, no matter where you started, it didn't matter to where you could end.

If the Republicans nominate someone who is an establishment Republican and who's a wholly-owned subsidiary of Wall Street, or the K Street lobbyists, we're gonna lose the election. We'd better elect somebody who understands what it's like to live on Main Street, a real-world American.

For ten and a half years, I was a governor. Three years before that, a lieutenant governor. I had the opportunity to learn, first hand, how to run a government. And a state's a whole lot like a microcosm of the federal government, in that you have agencies that are very similar  in fact, counterparts to it. That's why, most of the time, governors get elected president, because of the experience of having that executive-level decision-making within a government.

Now, I know there are some who say, "Mike, we love what you stand for. You're pro-life. You're pro-family. You're solid on the Second Amendment. You've cut taxes. You've done all of the things that we hope that a candidate for president would do, and you stand for those things. You've actually had a record on them, not just standing for them. It's one thing to say, 'I believe in something.' It's great to believe. It's even better to have done it." But there are those who say, "But, can you win?"

And the real question is, is it really about the money? And let me tell you, if this country allows the presidency to become more about the pocketbook than it is about the principles  we no longer are pursuing a presidency. We're pursuing a plutocracy, and God help us if we allow that to happen.

That's why, tonight, I come to you and simply ask you to give me your confidence, your vote, your support, your energy over these next few months, because I do believe we don't have too many seconds ticking, not only on my clock here, but on the clock in this country, whether we're gonna save this great Republic.

And I want to make it clear, it's not about saving the Republican Party. It is about saving this great republic. And if our party abandons the principles that caused many of us to become Republicans, then I'm not sure it's worth fighting for just the party. I would be very clear in telling you that tonight, it's an important night for America, because value voters will prove that they do matter, and whether or not people showed up, you showed up, and you'll show up at the ballot box and I hope you'll show up with me. Thank you.

TANCREDO: You know, I was just listening to the governor and to everybody that has been here, and I've got to tell you that I am proud to be on this stage with people with great integrity. I do not agree with some of them, but everybody on this stage is a person with great integrity, and I believe that that is something we should all be proud of, that the Republican Party, I think, has fielded people we can feel good about.

I  and that is so important. Don't I wish that we will have  I mean, I hope that I am the person that can offer you this, but I hope above everything that whatever, whoever it is that you decide upon, I hope that you are excited about voting for that person, because you believe in that person, because they believe in the things they say. Not just always another choice between "two evils." I have heard that for so long and personally, I'm sick of it. I'm not going to do that any more. I'm going to vote for  and, as I say, I hope I'm the guy, but I'm hoping you have that same opportunity to say, "I am absolutely committed to this person, because I believe in them."

America is the last, best hope of Western civilization, and we are under attack from jihadists abroad to multiculturalists at home. It is a scary thing. I have seen our flag trampled on May Day parades. I have listened to people talk about allegiances to other countries and, again, this idea of splitting us apart. I have seen the culture under attack.

Every single one of the questioners that came up here  what did they say? Every question that they asked, almost, was an indication, was a question about the culture itself. And it is under attack, and we have to worry about it. And the president is the only person that can lead us, in a rhetorical sense and from his own responsibilities, as the president of the United States, and the example he shows is the only one that can lead us out of this morass.

And I'll tell you again, it is our flag. When you see it, pick it up. It is our culture. Fight for it. It is our country. Take it back.

FARAH: Thank you, Representative Tancredo. John Cox, you have two minutes for your closing statement.

COX: For the past eighteen months, I've traveled all across Iowa, South Carolina, New Hampshire, more time than most of the candidates here, and I've been talking to real people. I don't talk to the media much. They don't want to talk to me. I'm not a celebrity.

I talk to the real people. And you know what? They're upset about what's going on in Washington the last number of years, and they blame Republicans, and many of the people on this stage have to take some responsibility for that. They may not have voted for a lot of this, but they didn't stand up against it.

So, we need to do something different in 2008. I'm a long-time activist, just like you. I'm one of the original members of the Club for Growth. And that's the Club for Growth  economic growth. That's what this country needs. That's what will provide a living for our children and a strong, secure nation.

I'm a long-time pro-life activist. I've marched outside Christ Hospital in Oak Lawn, with Jill Stanek, protesting the idea of letting babies die after they're born. I'm committed to your values, but I'm also committed to moving this country forward.

In order to do that, we need to nominate somebody who has a chance of winning, who is a perfect anti-Hillary. A businessman, not a career politician. If we nominate another career politician and they get up on that stage with Hillary, she's going to beat 'em to death with why they spent all that money, why they expanded government, why they didn't get anything done.

So, you've got to ask yourself. Are we going to keep doing the same things over and over again? What did Einstein say, that insanity is doing the same things and expecting a different result? Let's change what we're doing. Let's get some real management expertise into the presidency. Let's move this country forward. Let's get integrity and competence back in the Republican Party. Thank you very much.

FARAH: Thank you, John Cox. Senator Brownback, you have two minutes for your closing statement.

BROWNBACK: Thank you, and thank you, all that are here, and thank you, all that are listening to this. I also want to thank the people that are asking the questions, panels over here. I've worked with many of you, for many years on a lot of these causes, and I'm delighted to be here in this presidential debate, and I'm delighted that we're bringing these issues up in the debate, and I'm glad that people are fighting.

I've found in these fights over the years, the only way we lose is by not fighting for what we believe in. We've got to stand and fight. We've got to stand and fight for life. We've got to stand and fight for the family. We've got to stand and fight for our values  cheerily, merrily, happily, but we've got to stand and fight, and we lose when we keep backing up.

And so, I really appreciate the people that are here, and the fights that we've all been in together, and we're working, but we've got to win 'em now, and we've got to win 'em in this presidency.

I want to say one final thing on this point. Too often, I think we just look at the fight and the problems, and we don't do that second thing that Reagan did so well, which is look up and say just what a great place this is as a country. And I think we've got to do that. It's got to be that optimism that looks up, not just looking at our problems every day, but looking up to say, "This is the greatest nation in the history of mankind." The United States of America. We've got 5% of the world's population, 20% of the economy, a third of the world's military spending, 40% of the research and development budget for the world. Where we are today, the greatest nation in the history of mankind. Or as my kids would say, "The place rocks." It really does well.

But to whom much is given, much is required, and I believe fundamentally that the heart of our greatness is our goodness. If we ever lose that good heart, if we ever lose that goodness, we will most certainly lose our greatness. And that's why I come back to where I started, on the basics. Faith, family, freedom. That's where you get the goodness to build for the greatness, to move us on forward. Thanks for being in the fight. God bless you all.

PAUL: Thank you. We have been blessed to be able to live in the greatest country in the world. We've had the best contract between the people and the government, but we're losing it, and we have to realize that.

We have resorted to going to Washington for everything. We cannot go to Washington to dictate to us how we improve our personal behavior. You don't dictate, you don't legislate virtue. In a free society, you do that from people, from your family, your friends, and your neighbors, but not in the federal government.

Also, you can't legislate economic fairness, like so many want to do. Freedom means freedom. It means the government should be very small.

Also, although we have many good qualities, if you accept the principle that we can promote our qualities and force them on other people at risk, you're in big trouble, because there is a true phenomenon called blowback, and people don't like to have their countries occupied, and they will resent it, and we will suffer the consequences from this.

In the last several years, we as a party and as a country, we have suffered because the conservative movement has been taken over by the neoconservatives, and they're not conservatives at all. They don't believe in limited government. They believe in entitlements. They also believe in the Woodrow Wilson philosophy of making the world safe for democracy, run around the world, enforcing ourselves and bankrupting this country. We're spending nearly a trillion dollars a year overseas, and this country's in bad shape, financially.

So, we need to decide what we're gonna do. Are we going to live within the law, or are we going to pretend the government can take care of everything possible? We are now nine trillion dollars in debt, we have a dollar that's crashing, and we keep financing this by taxing, borrowing, and then, what do we resort to? We resort to printing the money!

We should look to the Constitution. We should make sure that we get rid of our central bank, the Federal Reserve, and have only gold and silver as legal tender. This is the reason our government gets so big, because we give them license to steal, license to inflate, license to tax, and license to borrow, and politicians will always do it.

What we should struggle for is our freedom. Have faith and trust in freedom, that it works. We've lost our faith and confidence in ourselves. We feel like we have to be the bullies of the world, and we feel like we have to have government in Washington. What happens when government fails in Washington? It's gonna go to the U.N., like we already have. We already obey the WTO. We change tax laws because of the WTO. There's every reason in the world, that if we just look to our traditions, and understood our problems, we can once again set the goal for liberty, not for this perfect society that comes at the sacrifice of liberty. When you ask government to do it, you have to sacrifice liberty.

This is not difficult to understand, but right now, we are drifting rather rapidly into a totalitarian state. We have been too willing to sacrifice our liberties for this so-called sense of security. We need more faith in the Second Amendment. We need more faith that the right of habeus corpus should be protected, and we have to understand the National I.D. Card is not going to work. That only registers and regulates the American people, and we don't need secret prisons. We don't need torture. We need American values and traditions. We need to believe in ourselves.

And once again, I would like to reiterate, from a Christian viewpoint, you know, the true doctrine of war written by Christianity, the doctrine of non-war, the just war, is that you do it only under certain circumstances. You don't do it for U.N. resolutions. You don't do it for weapons that don't exist. You need to do it with a moral justification. If we would have declared a war, like I insisted that they should, if they want to go to war, we wouldn't be debating the war now. It would be over, and we'd all be a lot better off, and we would have five thousand Americans still alive, and thirty thousand uninjured!

FARAH: OK, thank you, Dr. Paul. Next up is Representative Duncan Hunter. You have two minutes for your closing statement.

HUNTER: Thank you, Joseph. Ladies and gentlemen, we are at war, and we have 157 thousand American troops depending on leadership. That means the leadership of the Chief Executive, the Commander-in-Chief of the United States, and in Afghanistan we've got about 20 thousand. And a great deal weighs in the balance. That is, the struggle against Islamist fundamentalists weighs in the balance right now, and we have to leave Iraq in victory, not in defeat.

Now, a major part of being the president of the United States is being Commander-in-Chief. You know, I've served on the Armed Services Committee for the last 26 years. I've been the chairman for the last four years. I've worn the uniform of the United States. Didn't do anything special, but I served in Vietnam, and I've got a son who's now done three tours  two in Iraq, one in Afghanistan, and that means this. That means  that means I can look the American people in the eye in a military crisis, and I can say, "You know something? We are all in this together."

Now, we've got China emerging as a military superpower, Iran now developing nuclear systems, North Korea already has some and is racing to develop the means to deliver them. You need to have a Commander-in-Chief who knows how to keep America safe, and that's what I can do.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, when my son came back from Iraq, he said, "Families lift this country up. They provide us with fidelity, morality, faith in God, in raising the next generation of Americans."

I'm in this race for the next generation of Americans, and I hope you'll join me. Thank you very much.

KEYES: I find that we've heard, I think, many true things this evening. But then, there are words that we throw around, and we don't really want to think about their ultimate meaning. We talk about the heritage of our country, and yet we do not want to think through the real meaning of its principles.

We talk about liberty, but we don't want to look at what our Founders and other wise people have understood about that liberty.

This nation began  talking about its heritage  with a simple Declaration, that we are all created equal and endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. That means that, though I am dedicated to God and Jesus Christ, and in my heart and walk wish to abide by His law in my life, the reason I stand before you right now and have stood, in every context  not just before values voters, but before every voter in every context in this country, to declare the truth that unless we restore our respect for and allegiance to the authority of God, we shall lose our liberty, because without God, there is no liberty.

If our unalienable rights come from the Creator, God, and we deny the existence of the Creator  we do not teach creation in the schools, we do not advocate respect for the authority of the Creator, we allow folks to take the Ten Commandments out of our courtrooms, and don't go and stand, as I did, with Roy Moore, to champion the right of the people of this country to reverence God according to their conscience  if we don't do that and let God go, we haven't just let go a religious concept, religious liberty. We've let go the very foundations of everything we claim as a free people.

To go on talking about "liberty," and act as if we do not have to shape the heart and conscience of our children to respect the Source of liberty, which is the authority of God, that we can invite people, in licentiousness, to kill their children and do not have to respect the authority of God, and in their madness to define family in a way that does not respect the natural family dedicated to procreation, as ordained by Almighty God, then we lose our liberty.

We know this, though. I've worked with many of you, talked with many of you. Folks have heard me all around the country talk about these things.

The problem is, people say, "We've got to win," and I think that's true, but first we've got to remember that we don't fight for victory. We fight for liberty. We fight for justice. We fight for faith. We fight for God.

And though we are beaten, and though we are defeated, time and time again, we shall rise up and go on fighting! We do not fight for victory, but we shall fight until victory is won.

And how shall we do it? That's the key question. Well, I invite you all, go to AlanKeyes.com. It's my website. No, I'm sorry. Listen carefully to this.

Christ told us the exact strategy for victory. But, "O ye of little faith." See, He said that, and we think it's a rebuke. It wasn't a rebuke, because He told the mustard seed story: if you have just a little faith, you can move mountains.

Go to AlanKeyes.com, and seriously consider the Pledge that you find there. Every issue that we talked about tonight  you will find that Pledge dedicated to those issues. You will find me talking about all the things I have tried to do to promote them. And then you will be asked to make a simple pledge, to give $5 and find 5 people to do the same.

And I want you to think carefully what this new model of our politics would mean. No media, none of this relying on all the abortion-minded money and the ungodly media. No. Instead, we shall rely on the simple work of people of faith, doing exactly what they promised to do. And, as they keep their promise, they shall fulfill the promise of America.

FARAH: Thank you very much, and that concludes our debate this evening, but there is one more facet to it, and for our viewing audience at home, if you want to find out how this thing turned out and how the delegates in this audience voted, you're gonna have to go to the website, and that is valuesvoters.com. Use that website for the results of the straw poll. You'll also be able to order a DVD Voter's Guide at that site, which we highly recommend, something you may want to  you can share it with your friends and everyone you know.

I want to thank the candidates. I want to thank their staff, all of the national leaders, the questioners we had this evening  some of the best questions I've ever heard in a presidential debate  as well as everyone, everyone who volunteered their time so generously to make this event possible. Thanks to the delegates, to each of you for coming. Don't forget to order that Values Voter Guide DVD online, beginning tomorrow, and the website once again is valuesvoterdebate.com. Thank you, candidates, for being here. You've been extraordinary. They've been here for three hours without a break. Let's give them a big hand.

Terms of use

All content at KeyesArchives.com, unless otherwise noted, is available for private use, and for good-faith sharing with others  by way of links, e-mail, and printed copies.

Publishers and websites may obtain permission to re-publish content from the site, provided they contact us, and provided they are also willing to give appropriate attribution.